1. Neutron X-ray Scattering School, June 26, 2015
Proposal Writing: Hints for maximizing your chances for getting beam time General background on how DOE user facilities function and evolve
John Budai
Materials Science and Technology Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Now for something completely different
No equations!
Scientists spend a lot of time writing proposals, reviewing proposals and giving presentations.

2. User facilities are “free” for the users

3. X-ray and Neutron Sources (most DOE-Basic Energy Sciences)
CHESS
-II
NIST NCNR
5 DOE Nanoscience Centers (BNL, SNL/LANL, ORNL, ANL, LBNL)
DOE Electron Microscopy Centers (ANL, LBNL, ORNL)
Also

4. DOE-BES Scientific User Facilities
Electron Microscopy Center for Materials Research
Advanced Photon Source
Materials Preparation Center
Advanced Light Source
Center for Nanoscale Materials
Intense Pulsed Neutron Source
Center for Functional Nanomaterials
National Center for Electron Microscopy
National Synchrotron Light Source
Molecular
Foundry
National Synchrotron Light Source-II
Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
Spallation Neutron Source
Linac Coherent Light Source
Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences
Combustion Research Facility
Los Alamos Neutron Science Center
BES
Defense
Shared Research Equipment Program
Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies
Pulse Radiolysis Facility
High-Flux Isotope Reactor
Also
Advanced Scientific Computing Centers (e.g. NERSC)
NSF facilities (e.g. National High Magnetic Field Lab, CHESS, Nanotech)
(from Pat Dehmer presentation)

5. ORNL Home to many User Facilities (acronym required)
HFIR - High Flux Isotope Reactor
SNS - Spallation Neutron Source
BTRIC - Building Technologies Research and Integration Center
CNMS - Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences
CSMB - Center for Structural Molecular Biology (Bio-SANS)
CFTF - Carbon Fiber Technology Facility
MDF – Manufacturing Demonstration Facility (e.g. additive)
NTRC - National Transportation Research Center
OLCF - Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility
SL - Safeguards Laboratory
SHaRE - Shared Research Equipment (TEM, merged in CNMS)
Also, 2 EFRC’s (Energy Frontier Research Centers), 1 Energy Hub (Nuclear Modeling and Simulation )
Try a google search of National Labs for your area

6. X-ray and Neutron Sources Available Worldwide
Scattering Science Goes Global – access varies
 Light Sources summarized at
~60 facilities: 47 synchrotrons + 13 free electron lasers (FELs)
European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), Grenoble, France
SPRING-8, Japan
PETRA III, Germany
CLS, SLS, Shanghai, DIAMOND, BESSYII, SOLEIL, Taiwan, Pohang, …
XFEL.EU, SACLA, FLASH, …
 Neutron Sources summarized at
~48 research centers:
Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL), Grenoble, France
JSNS at J-PARC, Japan
ISIS UK
China Spallation Neutron Source, Dongguan (~2018)
European Spallation Source (ESS), Lund, Sweden (~2019)

7. DOE-BES Facilities Construction ~30 Years
$300M
$200M $K N S S
$100M N S L A P S S
$1.4B 2 L C
NSLS L A L S S
From P. Dehmer, Office of Science Update

8. BES MIE/Construction Funding Profile: 2000-2016
Near Future?
BESAC – Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee
LCLS-II (ultrafast, high rep MHz)
NEXT (NSLS-II EXp. Tools)
APS Upgrade (ultrabright MBA, repeat CD-)
SNS 2nd Target (cold neutrons)
Ongoing evaluations - Subject to change
Difficult choices with large impact.
Science driven.
“Critical Decisions”
CD-0, Mission Need (proposal)
CD-1, Alternative Selection & Cost Range
CD-2, Performance Baseline
CD-3, Start of Construction
CD-4, Start of Operations ?
2000
Fiscal Year
2016

9. Operating Budgets for the BES Scientific User Facilities
2015 ~$805M
BES FY2015
Materials Sciences & Eng $269M (16%)
Chem, Geo & Energy Bio Sciences $239M (14%)
Scientific User Facilities $805M (46%)
Construction $190M (11%)
Total $1733M
(K$) 9

10. FY 2015 Basic Energy Sciences (BES) Budget

11. BES User Facilities Hosted Over 16,000 Users in FY 2014
HFIR
SNS
LCLS
APS
ALS
SSRL
NSLS

12. Users by Facility at the Light Sources
SSRL 1974 & 2004
NSLS 1982
LCLS 2009
LCLS
ALS 1993
APS 1996
APS
ALS
SSRL
NSLS
1982
Synchrotron Light Sources Serve >11,000 Users/Year

13. Users by Discipline at the Light Sources
Number of Users 13

14. Neutron User Community and Research Growing
2014: = 3144 users

15. Neutron User Community

16. Both SNS and HFIR are oversubscribed

17. Basics of the facility proposal systems
All the DOE (NIST & NSF) neutron and x-ray sources offer access to beam time through an experimental proposal system. “General Users (GU)”.
Proposal submission is done through a web-based application. When and how often proposals are submitted varies by facility.
APS and NSLS-II three times (“cycles”) per year.
SNS/HFIR and ALS two times per year
All proposals are peer-reviewed and rated, and beam time is allocated using the scores of these reviews. Once time has been allocated, the beamline staff schedule the proposals.

18. Amount of general user time available
APS/NSLS/SSRL/ALS
All beamlines offer GU beam time.
Most DOE/NSF funded beamlines provide % of their time to general users.
SNS/HFIR
Amount varies by instrument.
~75% of time will be for general users.
For most, you can search facility websites by technique or by beamline. Quality of proposal websites varies.

19. Upcoming Proposal Deadlines: www.lightsources.org/deadlines
X-ray sources (cycles/yr) Deadlines
APS (3) July 10, 2015
ALS (2) September 2, 2015
NSLS-II (3) ~Oct 26, 2015
LCLS (~2) July 31, 2015
Neutron sources HFIR/SNS (2) ~Oct 14, 2015
NIST-NCNR (~2) June 16, 2015 (past)
These are generally hard deadlines.
APS always at Friday midnight (12:05  next cycle)
Inside Tip: Starting APS application process early (without submitting) gives you a lower ID #.

20. Users Get Started with Assistance of the Instrument Scientists
Study instrument web pages
Contact an Instrument Scientist to discuss your research
What is the research problem?
Which instrument(s) are appropriate? (scores?)
How mature is the research project (risk, size)?
What is the material – sample composition, form, size, availability?
What are the experimental conditions (temperature, pressure, magnetic field, etc)?
What will be measured?
Probability of success? Impact? Significance?
How will results be presented and to whom?
What is the timeline?

21. Instrument Scientists Assist First-time and Returning Users
Provide technical advice, guidance, and assistance
Instrument options
Sample and experiment preparation
Number of experiment days
Logistics (scheduling, transporting and storing samples)
Proposal preparation tips and assistance
Experiment team members
Data analysis
Publication considerations

22. Facilities have link on home page
Submitting a proposal
NSLS-II
APS
NIST
SNS
HFIR

23. Different types of proposals allow facility flexibility
Each facility has particular systems or proposal modes:
APS
GUP - General User Proposal. A "rapid-access beamtime request" against a submitted proposal can be considered for any unallocated general user time during the current run.
PUP – Partner User Proposal - Groups whose work involves a greater degree of collaboration with the APS. (e.g. major new instrumentation or technique).
11-BM User Program – Accepts user proposals for both on-site experiments and for the rapid-access mail-in service (~60% of user beamtime reserved for mail-in samples). Very easy – they send you capillary tubes. This capability is not obvious on the GUP website.
CHESS – Cornell (received new NSF funding)
Express-Mode proposals are for a single visit of limited duration to CHESS to perform a straight-forward experiment. Express-Mode proposals undergo a rapid on-line review process to enable users to quickly gain access to beam time.
Feasibility Study proposals are to test an idea or procedure at one of the CHESS stations.
NSLS  NSLS-II
7 beamlines now accepting General User Proposals
CSX1 (Coherent Soft X-ray Scattering), CSX2 (Coherent Soft X-ray Spectroscopy), CHX (Coherent Hard), HXN (Hard X-ray Nanoprobe), IXS (Inelastic X-ray Scattering), XPD (X-ray Powder Diffraction), SRX (Submicron Resolution X-ray Spectroscopy)
Commissioning on some other beamlines – opportunity to test ideas

24. Different types of proposals allow facility flexibility – cont.
NIST NCNR
MAIL-IN SAMPLES FOR POWDER DIFFRACTION Accepts proposals for experiments on the BT1 powder diffractometer on ”mail-in” samples. That is, samples may be mailed to NCNR staff, who will execute the data collection.
QUICK ACCESS PROPOSALS If a user feels that beam time is required very soon to carry out important measurements that cannot be delayed, a proposal may be submitted requesting expedited access. The proposal will be reviewed by the BTAC, and held to a substantially higher standard than regular proposals.
Macromolecular Crystallography is often a separate, self-contained community
A separate proposal system at APS.
Highly automated for mail-in measurements.
Beamtime relatively available.

25. Proposal forms at SNS and APS
SNS/HFIR
APS
Each proposal system will ask very similar questions

26. Questions asked Proposal Title
General Info (Title, Experimenters, Funding source, etc.)
Abstract - What is the scientific importance of the proposed research?
Why do you need the facility to do this research?
(Neutron vs. X-rays) or (Neutrons + X-rays)?
Why do you need an insertion device beamline instead of a bending magnet?
Spallation source vs. reactor source
Hard X-rays vs. Soft X-rays
Why do you need the beam line (and/or instrument)?
Particular technique or sample environment
What previous experience / results do you have (pubs important)?
Describe the proposed experiment(s), including samples and procedures. Show that you’re prepared.
Justification of the amount of time requested. Don’t be greedy or unrealistic about time needed. Ask beamline staff.

27. General Information

28. Proposal: General information
Pick a good title. Specific and to the point is better than spectacular and vague. Spectacular and specific is fine if credible.
Good: “XAS study of Fe valence in CaFe2As2 under pressure ”
Bad: “Understanding superconductivity in superconductors”
Is it thesis related? Is there a deadline?
Will push your proposal up if scores are close
Fill in the abstract - This is where reviewer develops first impression.
Do not just upload a PDF document! More work for reviewer.
Science impact in abstract is most important criteria for score.
Do upload a figure/publication from previous work.
Shows you made good use of beam time. Becoming more important.
Do not upload a 20 pages of supplemental information (figures often help, couple of plots with text OK)

29. Proposal: Experimenters page
Use the “find” feature
List everyone involved in experiment
Even theorists are useful to show impact

30. Experiment Description
Note guidance! Don’t write one sentence or 1000 words.
Do not use undefined jargon or acronyms that could frustrate reviewer!

31. Experimental Details Give background information why it is important.
Science at facilities is very diverse. Reviewer is not necessarily an expert on your subject. Try to capture imagination of reviewer with basic idea.
@ APS each committee gets ~60 proposals each cycle (~700 total/cycle)
Clearly state what you want to measure and how
Give details. Temperature range, X-ray Energy, Sample geometry
What sample characterization has been done already? (XRD, SEM, etc.)
Reviewer needs to judge if experiment is feasible
Does x-ray energy match laser penetration depth
% of dilute atoms OK for fluorescence measurements
Why use x-rays or neutrons?
Neutron vs. X-rays OR Neutron + X-rays?
TEM, Mössbauer, Laser Raman, etc.
Justify the amount of beam time requested (ask instrument scientist!)
Be reasonable.

32. Beamtime Request
APS proposals are valid for two years, but need to put in beam time request each cycle.
Chose multiple beamlines.
SAXS (12-ID, 5-ID, 15-ID)
XAFS (20-BM, 10-ID,12-BM)
General Diffraction
Don’t list only one week that you can come. Holidays?
Special sample environment / detectors will place more constraints on schedule.
GE amorphous Si detector
Magnet ….

33. Ratings for APS Proposals
APS proposals are rated on a scale from 1 to 5
Average score is ~2.2
Cut off score for receiving beam time varies by beamline ( )
Proposal “ageing” (score improves by 0.2 each cycle it does not receive time). This is needed for getting time at some oversubscribed beamlines, so long-term planning is needed. But you have to remember to request beamtime again for every cycle.

34. Pick appropriate panel – Important!
Old APS Panels
High Pressure
Instrumentation
Imaging/Microbeam
Macromolecular Crystallography
Scattering Applied Materials
New Panels
High Pressure
Instrumentation
Imaging/Microbeam
Macromolecular Crystallography
Scattering - Condensed Matter
Scattering - Applied Materials
Scattering – Chem / Biol / Environment
Small Angle Scattering (SAXS)
Spectroscopy
Structural Science
Inelastic X-ray scattering
If multiple possibilities - Look at members & Ask staff

35. ALS provides cutoff scores – Helps you know what to expect
Beamline cutoff scores 
easier
easier 
“Medium priority”
at Lake Wobegon
easier 
harder 
harder 
harder  1 2 4 5 3 
harder

36. Tips Give a concise explanation of this specific proposal
Provide background on importance (i.e., “bigger picture”)
State clearly and exactly what you are going to measure and why.
Reviewer want so assess likelihood of success.
Include relevant details to experiment but do not get too verbose
Reviewer needs to judge not only scientific importance, but also if the experiment is feasible and if you are asking for the right instrument.
If you are a first time user, talk to the local contact/instrument scientist.
Find out about details of the instrument, typical measuring times…
Over-subscription rate? Can a less popular instrument do the same measurements?
Send them the proposal ahead of time and ask for advice. Collaborate?
If you have previous results from other experiments include them!
Home, other institution, previous experiment.
Sample characterization.
Take advantage of proposal ageing. Plan ahead!

37. Several common pitfalls
Proposer assumes committee is familiar with their specialty. Explain impact.
Proposer writes large general vague proposal asking for multiple weeks of time. Better to write a shorter proposal with a well defined objective. Be realistic with beam time request.
Proposer submits 2 (or more) similar proposals for related materials thinking that multiple proposals increases chances.
Proposal deadline (for next cycle) is before scheduled beam time this cycle.
Common Reviewer comments:
“Proposers could improve their score by including more experimental details, attaching previous results and expanding on the purpose and importance of the research.”
“Hasn't the proposed research been published previously?”
“We do not feel that granting 20 shifts/cycle for 2 years is consistent with the history of publication of this work.”
“Proposer should perform initial characterization with lab sources or TEM.”

38. Allow time for review and revisions
After submission
Allow time for review and revisions
Expect feedback several weeks from the call close
Be ready to schedule experiment if approved
Identify participating team members
Respond to facility access approval information
Facilitate execution of user agreements
Complete required training
Confirm sample availability and description and laboratory needs
Consider reviewer comments if not approved and plan to resubmit this proposal or a new proposal in the next call. Opportunities (# of facilities and beamlines/facility) continue to grow.

39. Join SNS HFIR User Group (SHUG)
Chartered 1998
Open to individuals interested in using SNS and HFIR
Provides input to management on user concerns
Serves as a forum for keeping the user community informed
Acts as an advocacy group for neutron scattering science

40. ORNL’s Neutron Scattering Facilities HFIR and SNS
Numerous opportunities for collaboration
Become a user
Join SNS/HFIR User Group (SHUG)
Have your friends and colleagues apply to the National School on Neutron and X-ray Scattering
Attend workshops and conferences
Seek EPSCoR grants
and
Check ORISE internships, fellowships, and research programs (local contacts help)
Bring student groups to ORNL
Invite ORNL scientists to your campus
Collaborations essential: complementary tools, samples…

41. EPSCoR State Institutions are eligible for grants to support research
Seek EPSCoR Grants
EPSCoR State Institutions are eligible for grants to support research
Twenty five states, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are eligible to participate in the DOE EPSCoR program. [Iowa, Tennessee, Utah lost eligibility in February 2013.]

42. Office of Science Early Career Research Program (for your future consideration – very good for tenure)
Purpose: To support individual research programs of outstanding scientists early in their careers and to stimulate research careers in the disciplines supported by the Office of Science
Eligibility: Within 10 years of receiving a Ph.D., either untenured academic assistant professors on the tenure track or full-time DOE national lab employees (no postdocs)
Award Size:
University grants $150,000 per year for 5 years to cover summer salary and expenses
National lab awards $500,000 per year for five years to cover full salary and expenses
FY 2010 (Inaugural Year) Results:
69 awards funded via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
1,750 proposals peer reviewed to select the awardees
47 university grants and 22 DOE national laboratory awards
Awardees are from 44 separate institutions in 20 states
FY 2014:
35 scientists funded (750 applications), 17 National Labs + 18 Universities
Usually pre-application in Sept, Full applications from those encouraged in November.

43. Scientific User Facilities – (mostly from Pat Dehmer presentation)
Under construction at the time of the evaluation
Spallation Neutron Source
5 Nanoscale Science Research Centers
SSRL (SPEAR3) upgrade
Facilities underway since the evaluation
TEM Aberration Corrected Microscope
Linac Coherent Light Source
National Synchrotron Light Source - II
Facilities rated longer-term priority at the time of the evaluation
Spallation Neutron Source power upgrade (delayed)
Spallation Neutron Source 2nd target station
Advanced Light Source upgrade
Advanced Photon Source upgrade
What’s next in planning?
Ongoing BESAC Future Science Needs and Opportunities Evaluations
operating
operating
operating
operating
operating
operating
BESAC evaluation
Report released late 2003
Restarted 3 times!
Available at

44. Need good science, enthusiasm, politics, luck & perseverance
Next Generation Light/Neutron Sources are being Debated BESAC = Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee
BESAC Report on Future X-Ray Light Sources, July 25, 2013
High rep rate – Soft XFEL?
Free Electron Laser (FEL)?
“Ultimate” storage ring?
Energy Recovery Linac (ERL)?
APS/ESRF Upgrades
MAX IV Low-emittance lattice
Continue research development?
Impact of large Scientific User Facilities has grown significantly in the past ~25 yrs. They represent ~55% of BES budget and growth will continue.
They enable powerful new techniques, but researchers (you) have to drive the science.
Need good science, enthusiasm, politics, luck & perseverance
GOOD LUCK AND HAVE FUN!

45. Questions?